Engine: Swap a Golden Hawk motorinto a Speedster

[paulbearson]

I want to know if a 1957 Golden Hawk supercharged motor will fit under a 1955 Speedster hood without modification to the Speedster hood, for clearance. I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Golden Hawk's hood was bumped out to clear the supercharger's pulley.

Thanks.

Bj

[rockne10]

You read correctly. The standard Hawk hood had higher clearance than the
Speedster hood, and still needed the false "air intake" trim to clear the whirly thing.

[bezhawk]

A dealership in LA put them on Speedsters as an option. They were available as a completer kit from McCulloch .
Totally different from the 57-8 Golden hawk set-up.
There used to be pics of the set-up on VS-57.com

[53k]

I want to know if a 1957 Golden Hawk supercharged motor will fit under a 1955 Speedster hood without modification to the Speedster hood, for clearance. I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Golden Hawk's hood was bumped out to clear the supercharger's pulley.

Thanks.

Bj

Back in '69-'70 a mechanic at Ben Begier Studebaker in San Leandro, CA put a '57 Golden Hawk engine in his personal '55 Speedster. I don't remember how he dealt with the supercharger clearance, but he used the original hood. I have no idea what became of the car and the man is dead. Maybe Bob Peterson remembers.

[bezhawk]

Back in '69-'70 a mechanic at Ben Begier Studebaker in San Leandro, CA put a '57 Golden Hawk engine in his personal '55 Speedster. I don't remember how he dealt with the supercharger clearance, but he used the original hood. I have no idea what became of the car and the man is dead. Maybe Bob Peterson remembers.

See.....it can be done......but it will kill you!

[studegary]

I put a 1957 Golden Hawk engine in a 1953 Starliner. The hood would only make the first catch without making some modifications like lowering the engine mounts and removing the "cap" (solenoid cover) from the supercharger. I built that car in 1964, so my memory is a bit weak on it.

[paulbearson]

Thank you, gentlemen! I appreciate the quick response.

Bjarn

[52-fan]

When I first read your title my mind jumped to a 56 Golden Hawk engine. The 57 sounds like a better idea.

[studegary]

I want to know if a 1957 Golden Hawk supercharged motor will fit under a 1955 Speedster hood without modification to the Speedster hood, for clearance. I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Golden Hawk's hood was bumped out to clear the supercharger's pulley.

Thanks.

Bj

To clarify - The hood wasn't "bumped out". The hood had a clearance hole cut into it and then a fiberglass overlay was placed on the hood to cover the hole.

[PackardV8]

Swap a Golden Hawk motor into a Speedster

When I first read your title my mind jumped to a 56 Golden Hawk engine. The 57 sounds like a better idea.

SEZ WHO? JMHO, but the '56GH and '57GH have the same horsepower and weight, but the Packard V8 has much more low end torque and is a better driver. If one wanted to do it really right, the '56 Caribbean 374" V8 with 2x4bbls will run rings around the '57 GH Stude V8 and that's just the beginning of what is possible with the big iron. Your car, your money, your decision, but take a close look before passing on a Packard V8 ;>)

jack vines

[Jim B PEI]

SEZ WHO? JMHO, but the '56GH and '57GH have the same horsepower and weight, but the Packard V8 has much more low end torque and is a better driver. If one wanted to do it really right, the '56 Caribbean 374" V8 with 2x4bbls will run rings around the '57 GH Stude V8 and that's just the beginning of what is possible with the big iron. Your car, your money, your decision, but take a close look before passing on a Packard V8 ;>)

jack vines

Jack, what is the weight difference between the Caribbean version 374 and the supercharged 289? There is some between the 352 and the S-289, but likely not that much more weight for much more HP in the 374. What would you do to improve the C/K handling of that power and weight?

[PackardV8]

Jack, what is the weight difference between the Caribbean version 374 and the supercharged 289?

Here are the facts: I weighed both engines on the same hanging dynometer scale on the same day. Both were ready-to-run standard shift engines with all accessories. The '56GH weighed 715#and the '57 GH weighed 705#.

It is a complete myth that the heavy Packard was the cause of the '56 GH being an inferior handler to the lighter '57 Studebaker GH. The Packard V8 is longer by 4", so carries its weight a little bit higher and farther forward than an unsupercharged Studebaker. Adding the supercharger and all the plumbing moves weight higher and farther forward on the '57-58 GHs, so it's a wash.

My personal theory is most who had driven the earlier Studes were used to the lighter, less heavily optioned cars. When the '56J hardtop with PS, PB, PW, it was probably the heaviest post-war Studebaker ever built. It does seem nose-heavy compared to the earlier cars, but not compared to the '57-57 GHs.

What would you do to improve the C/K handling of that power and weight?

1. Move the battery to the trunk.
2. 6" wheels from a Ford or Mopar and performance radial tires.
3. Heavy duty front and rear sway bars and shock absorbers
4. Remove the front bumper guards
5. Paper air filter.
6. Move the front seat tracks back to get more leg room and get that CASO lard farther back and lower. This really changes the feel of the car.

jack vines

[mbstude]

Jack, I was waiting for your reply to that and I knew that I'd agree with you. I've driven a couple of 56J's, both automatic and overdrive equipped, and they are not bad handling cars at all.

[Jim B PEI]

Thats what I love about this place! Lots of folks who have been there, have done it ,and continue to do it well. Great having these myths debunked!

[Studeous]

I did a little measuring in the garage on a 53. The oil cap on the front of a V8 is about 9.5 inches off of the block. The high point on a SV57 is 12 inches off the block and a little forward of an older V8 oil cap. The max that the V8 could be lowered on the front mounts would be a little less than an inch, due to the harmonic balancer hitting the bell crank. If you have an automatic trans you could drill 2 more holes 5/8 of an inch lower on the mounts, to lower the trans 5/8 of an inch. looks like the engine and trans could go back a half an inch max toward the firewall. A new hole could be drilled where the front motor mount mounts to the frame. There is also room to drill the to lower holes on the trans mount forward a half inch. From my preliminary measuring on a 53, it looks like, if you lowered it and moved it back, that it would still rub on the first catch. If the 55 has about an inch and a half more room in this area it might just work. Good Luck.

Richard Burks
53s
57 Transtar
64 Daytona 4 door (Lucy)
"Somewhere between Culture and Agriculture in the Geographic center of Tennessee"